Please sign the bus lane petition.



Nick wrote:
> spindrift wrote:
> > http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1145
> >
> > The evidence seems clear to me, motorbikes are faster moving, heavier,
> > and pose a greater risk to cyclists.
> >

> I'd sign one to ban buses from bus lanes but I don't have a problem with
> motorbikes.


LCC:


Concerns are mounting as motorcyclists are disproportionately
hazardous to cyclists and pedestrians: according to CTC, PTWs are
about 1.5 times as likely as cars to be involved in collisions which
cause serious injury to cyclists, twice as likely to be involved in
causing them serious injury and about three times as likely to be
involved in killing them, per mile travelled.

Data already collected shows an increase in the number of casualties
to motorcyclists and other road users as a result of the experiment.
Transport for London should be planning to remove the concession to
motorcyclists: they need to ensure that there is effective enforcement
of bus lane restrictions.
 
spindrift wrote:
>
> Nick wrote:
>> spindrift wrote:
>>> http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1145
>>>
>>> The evidence seems clear to me, motorbikes are faster moving, heavier,
>>> and pose a greater risk to cyclists.
>>>

>> I'd sign one to ban buses from bus lanes but I don't have a problem with
>> motorbikes.

>
> LCC:
>
>
> Concerns are mounting as motorcyclists are disproportionately
> hazardous to cyclists and pedestrians: according to CTC, PTWs are
> about 1.5 times as likely as cars to be involved in collisions which
> cause serious injury to cyclists, twice as likely to be involved in
> causing them serious injury and about three times as likely to be
> involved in killing them, per mile travelled.
>
> Data already collected shows an increase in the number of casualties
> to motorcyclists and other road users as a result of the experiment.
> Transport for London should be planning to remove the concession to
> motorcyclists: they need to ensure that there is effective enforcement
> of bus lane restrictions.
>
>

Better to enforce sensible speed limits. How about Motorbikes are
allowed in bus lanes but only allowed to go 20 mph. Seems a bit mean to
make them wait in the queues.
 
Nick wrote:
> spindrift wrote:
> >
> > Nick wrote:
> >> spindrift wrote:
> >>> http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1145
> >>>
> >>> The evidence seems clear to me, motorbikes are faster moving, heavier,
> >>> and pose a greater risk to cyclists.
> >>>
> >> I'd sign one to ban buses from bus lanes but I don't have a problem with
> >> motorbikes.

> >
> > LCC:
> >
> >
> > Concerns are mounting as motorcyclists are disproportionately
> > hazardous to cyclists and pedestrians: according to CTC, PTWs are
> > about 1.5 times as likely as cars to be involved in collisions which
> > cause serious injury to cyclists, twice as likely to be involved in
> > causing them serious injury and about three times as likely to be
> > involved in killing them, per mile travelled.
> >
> > Data already collected shows an increase in the number of casualties
> > to motorcyclists and other road users as a result of the experiment.
> > Transport for London should be planning to remove the concession to
> > motorcyclists: they need to ensure that there is effective enforcement
> > of bus lane restrictions.
> >
> >

> Better to enforce sensible speed limits. How about Motorbikes are
> allowed in bus lanes but only allowed to go 20 mph. Seems a bit mean to
> make them wait in the queues.



Possible. hard to enforce?

Plus, say there's a cycle lane feeder to an ASL. The motorbikes have
nowhere to go- I honestly can't see the buggers waiting behind the
cyclists at the lights, so this move brings faster, heavier vehicles
into conflict with cyclists.
 
On Wed, 28 May 2008 09:59:03 +0100, Nick <[email protected]>
wrote:

>spindrift wrote:
>> http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1145
>>
>> The evidence seems clear to me, motorbikes are faster moving, heavier,
>> and pose a greater risk to cyclists.
>>

>I'd sign one to ban buses from bus lanes but I don't have a problem with
>motorbikes.


Me too.

To the OP: Since when have motorbikes been heavier than busses?

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org
 
Nick wrote:
> spindrift wrote:
>> http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1145
>> The evidence seems clear to me, motorbikes are faster moving, heavier,
>> and pose a greater risk to cyclists.


> I'd sign one to ban buses from bus lanes but I don't have a problem with
> motorbikes.


The issues are:
- Do you want to promote motorcycling?
Allowing them in bus lanes will increase their numbers throughout London.
- What are bus lanes for?
Buses.
- Why were cycles allowed in them?
Because of the effect of forcing them into the other lane (petrified
cyclists and delayed motorists). These effects do not happen with
motorbikes.
- How much space do you want when overtaken?
In a typical 3-metre bus lane, a cyclist riding far enough out to
prevent a taxi from squeezing past within the lane will leave about
1.6m gap on their right. A motorcyclist would aim at the middle of
this gap, passing within half a metre of the cyclist. At present they
try to encroach as litle as possible on the bus lane.

The recommended width for a bus lane is 4.5m. Allowing motorbikes only
in bus lanes this wide would have less direct impact on cyclists'
safety, but would still promote motorcycling.

Colin McKenzie

--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.
 
On 28 May, 19:20, Colin McKenzie <[email protected]> wrote:
> Nick wrote:
> > spindrift wrote:
> >>http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1145
> >> The evidence seems clear to me, motorbikes are faster moving, heavier,
> >> and pose a greater risk to cyclists.

> > I'd sign one to ban buses from bus lanes but I don't have a problem with
> > motorbikes.

>
> The issues are:
> - Do you want to promote motorcycling?
> Allowing them in bus lanes will increase their numbers throughout London.
> - What are bus lanes for?
> Buses.
> - Why were cycles allowed in them?
> Because of the effect of forcing them into the other lane (petrified
> cyclists and delayed motorists). These effects do not happen with
> motorbikes.
> - How much space do you want when overtaken?
> In a typical 3-metre bus lane, a cyclist riding far enough out to
> prevent a taxi from squeezing past within the lane will leave about
> 1.6m gap on their right. A motorcyclist would aim at the middle of
> this gap, passing within half a metre of the cyclist. At present they
> try to encroach as litle as possible on the bus lane.
>
> The recommended width for a bus lane is 4.5m. Allowing motorbikes only
> in bus lanes this wide would have less direct impact on cyclists'
> safety, but would still promote motorcycling.
>
> Colin McKenzie
>
> --
> No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
> the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
> walking.
> Make an informed choice - visitwww.cyclehelmets.org.



What's wrong with promoting motor bikes? They certainly reduce
congestion
 
Colin McKenzie wrote:
> Nick wrote:
>> spindrift wrote:
>>> http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1145
>>> The evidence seems clear to me, motorbikes are faster moving, heavier,
>>> and pose a greater risk to cyclists.

>
>> I'd sign one to ban buses from bus lanes but I don't have a problem
>> with motorbikes.

>
> The issues are:
> - Do you want to promote motorcycling?
> Allowing them in bus lanes will increase their numbers throughout London.
> - What are bus lanes for?
> Buses.
> - Why were cycles allowed in them?
> Because of the effect of forcing them into the other lane (petrified
> cyclists and delayed motorists). These effects do not happen with
> motorbikes.
> - How much space do you want when overtaken?
> In a typical 3-metre bus lane, a cyclist riding far enough out to
> prevent a taxi from squeezing past within the lane will leave about 1.6m
> gap on their right. A motorcyclist would aim at the middle of this gap,
> passing within half a metre of the cyclist. At present they try to
> encroach as litle as possible on the bus lane.
>
> The recommended width for a bus lane is 4.5m. Allowing motorbikes only
> in bus lanes this wide would have less direct impact on cyclists'
> safety, but would still promote motorcycling.
>



What's wrong with promoting motorcycling. Less pollution and congestion
than cars.

I thought cyclists were allowed to use bus lanes as a reward for being a
more favourable form of transport than cars and hence to be
encouraged. Much the same reason as buses are allowed to use them.



> Colin McKenzie
>
 
"Sir Jeremy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:bd07abeb-eb90-4e49-a79b-75d2a94ca3a3@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>>

>
>
> What's wrong with promoting motor bikes? They certainly reduce
> congestion


No. If you ride a motorcycle according to all the advice about riding
safely, you take up as much room as a car, so there is no reduction in
congestion. The picture used to promote the governments motorcycling policy
summed it up very effectively: three motorcycles taking up the space of
about six cars.
 
"Nick" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>

>
>
> What's wrong with promoting motorcycling. Less pollution and congestion
> than cars.


No. Motorcycles may, and only may, produce less CO2 than a car, but they
produce much more of other pollutants. This has been looked at by a Royal
Commission for transport and pollution, and they could find "no
environmental reasons for promoting motorcycling."
 
"Fr Jack" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> spindrift <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>and pose a greater risk to cyclists.

>
> Rubbish!


As someone who regularly is forced to share bus lanes with motorcycles, this
is not rubbish, this is absolutely true. The behaviour of some motorcylists
is almost unbelievable, and my life has been put at risk a number of times
by aggressive and irresponsible motorcyclists, in bus lanes. One of the
problems is that as soon as they are allowed in bus lanes, they
automatically assume that they can use any cycle facility, and do so,
including cycle lanes, ASLs, bicycle parking. There's one particular quad
bike rider in north Bristol who I have difficulty in believing that he is
still alive, or that he hasn't killed someone.
 
Nick wrote:
> I thought cyclists were allowed to use bus lanes as a reward for being a
> more favourable form of transport than cars and hence to be encouraged.
> Much the same reason as buses are allowed to use them.


Not originally, and cycles are still excluded from many bus only
cut-throughs and contraflow lanes. There's one about 100m from my
front door. If I'm going the way it goes, the detour is about 300m.

It is rare for bus lanes to be created unless they benefit buses. It
is not unknown - there's another bus lane close to me which is served
by no buses. This is incompetence, not a cycle facility, though.

Colin McKenzie

--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.
 
"burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Fr Jack" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> spindrift <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>and pose a greater risk to cyclists.

>>
>> Rubbish!

>
>As someone who regularly is forced to share bus lanes with motorcycles, this
>is not rubbish, this is absolutely true. The behaviour of some motorcylists
>is almost unbelievable, and my life has been put at risk a number of times
>by aggressive and irresponsible motorcyclists, in bus lanes.


And there you have it...

Some is far from all.

>One of the
>problems is that as soon as they are allowed in bus lanes, they
>automatically assume that they can use any cycle facility, and do so,
>including cycle lanes, ASLs, bicycle parking.


Never seen any of that, other than actually being directed to park my
Beemer in a cycle parking area - and if the warden says to do it, who
am I to argue? The cyclist who tried to whinge at me about it found
himself bodily picked up and deposited, a couple of hundred yards
away, at the feet of the warden, who informed him of the error of his
ways and also told him to stop being a ******.

I get the feeling you are confusing scooterist scum with motorcyclists
- not a good idea.

>There's one particular quad
>bike rider in north Bristol who I have difficulty in believing that he is
>still alive, or that he hasn't killed someone.


Those who choose to ride quads on the road desperately need to be
removed from the gene pool.
--

Fr. Jack

The ex(un)civil servant
 
On Wed, 28 May 2008 22:01:23 +0100
"burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "Paul Boyd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > spindrift said the following on 28/05/2008 09:48:
> >> http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1145

> >
> > The vast majority of the country probably don't really much care
> > about what happens in one city.

>
> London today, every other bus lane in the country tomorrow.
>

Imagine the repercussions when they introduce congestion charging in
Great Wyrley ...
 
On Thu, 29 May 2008 01:47:07 +0100
Fr Jack <[email protected]> wrote:

> I get the feeling you are confusing scooterist scum with motorcyclists
> - not a good idea.
>

Just as 'proper' cyclists don't like to be confused with the
pedestrian-on-a-bike I imagine motorcyclists particularly resent any
perceived association with the chav-on-a-hairdryer.
 
"Fr Jack" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>

>
> Never seen any of that, other than actually being directed to park my
> Beemer in a cycle parking area - and if the warden says to do it, who
> am I to argue?


So when you were prosecuted for illegal parking, you'd have sued the warden?
>
> I get the feeling you are confusing scooterist scum with motorcyclists
> - not a good idea.


No, almost all of these extremely dangerous people are on motorcycles,
including the one who deliberately rode at two cyclists but had an
unregistered bike, so the police couldn't trace him.
>
>>There's one particular quad
>>bike rider in north Bristol who I have difficulty in believing that he is
>>still alive, or that he hasn't killed someone.

>
> Those who choose to ride quads on the road desperately need to be
> removed from the gene pool.


Couldn't agree more, but this guy seems to lead a charmed life, doing
incredibly dangerous things but living to tell the tale. Just a matter of
time I suppose until his luck runs out.
 

Similar threads

R
Replies
2
Views
437
Road Cycling
Rik Van Diesel
R